Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that

Linux is not restricted to Servers. I use SuSE linux in both workstation
and Server environments. It is an excellent distribution of Linux.

I didn't have difficulty setting up a Windoze network. That bit is
actually quite easy. My problem was Windoze crashing, Loosing
connections, loosing data. You name it, it probably happened. I cost me
at least half a day per week just to keep the PCs going. Eventually I
had one crash too many, lost all my saved e-mail, cursed Bill Gates till
the air turned blue and looked for an alternative. I had had 4-5 years
of crashing operating systems and enough was enough. Now I spend almost
no time keeping my systems alive.

Don't get me wrong, I still use windows as well. In many cases I have no
choice (eg. Ops Nav). But now I have the option not to use it as well.

There are those who can't see past the Microsoft gate, I used to be one
of them. But in the last few years I have opened my eyes to the wider
world out there.

Syd Nicholson



rob@dekko.com wrote:

>This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>--
>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>4)  Not too long ago a general feeling from several list subscribers was
>that linux was fine for servers but not recommended for clients.  Granted,
>I don't know jack about linux, but that opinion was generated from linux
>proponents.  And as far as your difficulties in setting up a windows
>network - I'd wager to say there's a fair number of people who feel the
>opposite of you.  Granted, this may be because of their limited exposure
>to Linux.
>
>
>Rob Berendt
>--
>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>Benjamin Franklin
>
>
>
>
>Dr Syd Nicholson <sydnic@ccs400.com>
>Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
>04/10/2002 10:50 AM
>Please respond to midrange-l
>
>
>        To:     midrange-l@midrange.com
>        cc:
>        Fax to:
>        Subject:        Re: Cheaper Servers? - Been there - done that
>
>
>--
>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>To create a real portable iSeries IBM need to create a GUI AS/400.
>Unless that happens we will always need another PC system to connect to
>it.
>
>A native OS/400 GUI and native iSeries display, keyboard and mouse. A
>prime requirement for a laptop iSeries.
>
>The only 'native' display access an iSeries has is green screen text
>based. This must seriously hinder sales in an all GUI world.
>
>Perhaps an X-Server type approach and a third party product such as KDE
>or Gnome would be the way forward.
>
>Politically I don't think IBM have any interest in this. They work on
>the basis that everyone uses Windoze so they only provide GUI software
>(eg. CA/400, Ops Nav, Code/400) to run under Windoze. In so doing they
>FORCE all their customers to use Windoze. Please correct me if I am
>wrong, but I am not aware of any IBM created CA/400 software for other
>operating systems (eg. Linux). They insist we use Ops Nav, and Ops Nav
>only runs under Windoze.
>
>Personally I concluded that even maintaining a small Windoze network was
>too expensive on my time. I now use Linux (much better, and more stable)
>and question IBM's commitment to Linux. They seem to want it on their
>servers (the words bandwagon and jump spring to mind) but I don't know
>of any serious client side Linux developments. I would love to see a
>CA/400 for Linux.
>
>Syd Nicholson
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>